Critics warn GSA property sell-off could destabilize DC market and federal operations

GSA's acceleration of federal property disposal is drawing sharp criticism from real estate experts and lawmakers who warn the strategy could backfire—financially and operationally—if not executed carefully.

The Trump administration’s DOGE is leading the initiative, which aims to drastically shrink the federal footprint and generate savings by selling off underused properties and canceling leases. GSA had initially listed more than 440 buildings for disposal in March, but quickly retracted the list following public backlash, including concern that some buildings—such as a newly constructed federal facility in Cambridge, Massachusetts—were erroneously added. GSA has since adopted what it calls a “more incremental approach,” publishing a pared-down list of 16 properties, as reported by Government Executive.

The Washington Business Journal reported on the 8 April House Oversight hearing, where Ron Kendall, former GSA Public Buildings Service asset officer, described the initiative as “cataclysmic” for Washington, DC, where commercial vacancy rates remain elevated. “You’re going to get the lowest price possible if you can move the assets at all,” Kendall said, warning that selling in a down market risks squandering taxpayer value.

David Marroni of GAO supported a cautious strategy, calling GSA’s step back “a positive move.” He acknowledged the federal government has been slow to shed excess space, an issue GAO has flagged since 2003, but cautioned against moving too quickly without considering agency mission impacts.

DOGE Chairwoman Marjorie Taylor Greene praised the effort as a historic rollback of government bloat, while Democrats like Rep. Melanie Stansbury likened the process to a “fire sale,” arguing it is part of a broader attempt to dismantle the federal workforce.

Beyond property sales, DOGE has terminated 676 federal leases, claiming $400 million in savings. Kendall questioned whether agencies’ ongoing space needs are being overlooked simply because leases were in their termination windows.